>>Barnes writes:>>>Mr. Graber, your point is, uh, well-made. Technology has been of>>paramount importance in human evolution.>>Few evolutionists would argue that any one thing was of 'paramount
importance' and I don't think that this was Dr. Graber's point>>> I would point out>>that hunting and gathering do require a degree of cooperation and>>communication.>>...Yes, just like the communication and cooperation required in building an
ant hill, or hunting in a pack of lions, wild dogs or chimps, organizing a
school of fish.... Humans are not that far removed from other social animals
and if we were, we'd be hard pressed to explain how objectively.>>>Also, preventing a leopard from biting your head>>becomes easier with a little help.>>many artiodactyls do just fine.>>>And, we are not talking about the>>monolithic march of a block of pre-humanity down the evolutionary path.>>We are talking about differential reproduction _within_ a species which,>>over a vast period of time, creates a new species.>>I'm not really sure what we are talking about at this point.>>>Take a look at the>>changes in technology over that period of time. The changes are not>>dramatic.>>Well, ruling out the agricultural and industrial revolutions that is...>>>(admittedly, we can only view an incomplete picture). I would>>argue that enhanced social skills played some small role in the>>differential survival and reproduction of some individuals over others>>and thus, the development of "intelligence.">>With the addition of the word 'small', I would have to agree. But I think
one could also say that the development of decreased body hair had as much
to do with it. I don't mean to be annoying, but we need to stop looking for
monolithic explanations and prime-movers. Even in biological evolution, one
can not find reasonable examples of situation 'A' causing adaptive response
'B'. Life, on the whole, is always much more complex.>>>Remember, over the time>>periods we are talking about the differential does not have to be at all>>large.>>>>And who says social problems are not practical problems?>>This is certainly a good point - as Raninow and others like to point out -
social facts are as real as any other kind of fact. Nevertheless, Who
thinks they can reconstruct the social environment (RE: social facts)
surrounding early hominids and early Homo sapiens sapiens? I don't.>>>And, expanding out of the tropics is irrelevant to evolution.>>>>And, quite frankly, technology has been done to death.>>Well, overdone yes.... but nothing in our barely premature science has been
'done to death'.>>>The implications>>of intelligence on social organization and vice versa is far more>>interesting.>>Yes, but unfortunately, irretrievable for most. I doubt that anybody can
see past their assumptions and projections on this account.>>>Jim Barnes>>Cheers,>Matt>
__________________________________________________________

Matt Tomaso
Department of Anthropology
University of Texas at Austin
Home:TOMASO@UTXVMS.CC.UTEXAS.EDU
Field:MTOMASO@AOL.COM
__________________________________________________________